I don't know the answer, but the reasoning is flimsy. Training programs, hm, they have those on diversity and harassment too. M&A lawyers self-selected to be less greedy and not high-fliers, right because they work in volume. Memoranda with code names, alright, what file was it found in?

4:53 pm November 5, 2009

anon wrote:

None of these guys just busted looks like he'd do that well in a fight in a prison yard or shower. They will do very hard time indeed.

5:33 pm November 5, 2009

Roger wrote:

ALL COMPANIES have training programs (incl. Intel, AMD, IBM, etc..). But somehow high level executives in IBM, AMD, ... were involved. So, I can apply Pierce's argument to those defendents as well (e.g. training, their career, blah, blah, blah).

High-tech world was (and still is) like the wild-wild west. Options backdating, spin-off and spin-ins, insider trades are more prevalent than people think. Some legal, some illegal. Bottom-line is that shareholders are stiffed. But the bubbly and euphoric nature of high tech allows a lot of the sins to be hidden (and maybe even forgiven). If the stock rises, who is going to complain?!? Obviously, there are people doing it for money. But there's a bit of "because I can" attitude. I just don't think those who get caught thinks the law applies to them.

I tend to agree with Pierce, for the most part - and again, we're generalizing - but lawyers don't get to where they are by being big risk-takers. If anything, they're usually more conservative and overly conscious of consequences. Not impulsive or quick-payoff types. They're also VERY concerned with reputation. Of course, there's always exceptions, but if you showed me a room full of lawyers and a room full of bankers, ii'd bet money that the lawyers would have the lower instance of leaking sensitive info....

7:15 pm November 5, 2009

Gluteus Maximus wrote:

Wait - you mean you expect lawyers to act ethically?!?

9:48 pm November 5, 2009

Tamza wrote:

indeed they have 'training' programs, but those are just for HR to check off a box on their must-do-to-do list. even the presenters do not take it seriously

10:17 pm November 5, 2009

Dick wrote:

Mort, If you need help getting your head out of your posterior, I'll be glad to help.

8:09 am November 6, 2009

bangha all day wrote:

maybe he knows his fone is being tapped ? that's why he says --what he says
really covert i say

12:09 pm November 6, 2009

anon wrote:

The capitalist society that we live in prizes hard work, dedication, education, and knowledge. All of these traits are exhibited by aggressive traders and lawyers. The fact that they have worked hard enough to make it to a big law firm, have been hired by other smart people who make lots of money and have good information to trade and make money for themselves is a great thing. The people who used this information to make a killing in the market are just smart capitalists. The liberal democrats who moralize about their trades are hypocrites. The USA is a capitalist society and these people should be rewarded not prosecuted. They spend their gains in the USA, put the money in our banks, pay taxes for supporting the other people who are not smart enough or don't work hard enough to have much. Why are we prosecuting these people for using their smarts to make lots of money? Isn't that the American way?

8:33 am November 10, 2009

J wrote:

Well, what did you expect him to say?

1:06 am December 30, 2009

coetsee wrote:

There are some thin if the legitimate work as a line there. Most are sites and marketing study for the site owner rich, not you. The only thing is true legitimacy Ebay, selling things you already own

onlineuniversalwork

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

About Law Blog

The Law Blog covers the legal arena’s hot cases, emerging trends and big personalities. It’s brought to you by lead writer Jacob Gershman with contributions from across The Wall Street Journal’s staff. Jacob comes here after more than half a decade covering the bare-knuckle politics of New York State. His inside-the-room reporting left him steeped in legal and regulatory issues that continue to grab headlines.

A federal judge in Manhattan rejected a bid by the conservative advocacy group Citizens United to stop New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman from requiring that charities disclose to him their major donors.

Concerns about a gender gap in the legal profession tend to focus on issues like pay, billing rates and who makes partner. A new study by the American Bar Association looks inside the federal courtroom to see who's trying cases.